Add check_smart.pl plugin as smart-advanced command

[Napsty]

This PR adds the check_smart.pl monitoring plugin under the smart-advanced check command (smart is already used by the check_ide_smart plugin).

[Napsty]

Hi guys, do you still need something from me? I'm not sure from the notes above.

[julianbrost]

I think we mainly have to agree on notation here. Meanwhile, I could remember a similar case with different checks: postgres where you can either pass a hostname or address as -H or a Unix Domain Socket as -s. But this case is special as -H is already set by default, but I suggest doing the following:

Always put the device name in smart_device (regardless of whether it's a glob or not) and have a second variable smart_device_is_glob that devices whether -d $smart_device$ or -g $smart_device$ is passed to the plugin.

@Al2Klimov What do you think of this?

For reference, this is how it's done for postgres:

icinga2/itl/plugins-contrib.d/databases.conf

Lines 519 to 523 in 4308979

	"-H" = {
	value = "$postgres_host$"
	set_if = {{ macro("$postgres_unixsocket$") == false }}
	description = "hostname(s) to connect to; defaults to none (Unix socket)"
	}

[Napsty]

@julianbrost OK let's try the latest version, see my commit ca9fcf3. I'm using the same way from your example with from postgres check. Never used this macro way though, so you'd have to tell me if that was correctly used.
Documentation adjusted.
New parameter smart_ssd_lifetime added.

[julianbrost]

In addition to the comments below, please also squash your changes into a single commit.

[julianbrost]

The new file also has to be added in itl/plugins-contrib.d/CMakeLists.txt so that it will actually be used.

[waja]

This is now 1y pending ... still no improvement yet.

[Napsty]

Yes, that's on me. I always need some time to re-think into that issue every time, but some disasters always come in between. Sorry about that.

[yhabteab]

I see some arguments in the docs that aren't part of this PR and I'm not sure whether they are new or not. However, this PR is open for far too long now, and I think I would just merge it unles @julianbrost says otherwise, since you're the one actively changes requested here, which AFAICS are all addressed.

My review was addressed.

[julianbrost]

Yes, looks like what I requested was addressed, but then this PR completely fell under the radar. Sorry about that.

[yhabteab]

I've rebased and squashed the commits! Thanks for your contribution.